Hello all,
I am writing regarding proposed government cuts in education provision. For the coming academic year the government has pldeged to cap the numbers of entrants to higher eucation. Within the last few weeks two Liverpool Universities have announced intentions to cut courses and student numbers. There have been previous announcements to cut courses and students at Nottingham Trent, Salford and London University. These affect both Postgraduate and undergraduates.
For the previous decade Higher Education has opened its doors to new students, many from poorer backgrounds, myself included, who would not have previously had the chance to attend university. This has been great progress and many people have been able to fulfil their potential who would not previously have been able to do so. To reverse this decision now is an utter disgrace, we must come together and fight every cut, no matter where they occur. Youth unemloyment is rising, if we cut the oportunities for people to acquire skills what will happen to these people?
Take Action!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=74156927336
I have started a group to fight cuts at my own university LJMU, please investigate your own Unis intention regarding cuts and start up a group to stop the cuts. Hopefully we can work together and form a national group opposed to all cuts in education. Never again must the potential of people, from whatever background, go to waste.
In Solidarity
Nick Barnett
Friday, 13 March 2009
Monday, 23 February 2009
An encouraging development
Hello supporter.
Late last week I received a letter from the house of commons in response to two question submitted on my behalf by Mrs Louise Ellman, MP for Liverpool riverside. I would appreciate your thoughts on this issue.
Here is the text of one of the responses.
"Mrs Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside): TO ask the Secretary of State for innovation, universities and skills, if he will increase the funding available for students from poorer backgrounds to pursue postgraduate studies.
David Lammy:This government acknowledges the value of postgraduate studies. However, we have to prioritise the funding available. Our priority is to ensure that finance is no barrier to students achieving a first degree: that is why statutory student support is concentrated on undergraduates.
However, there are also a number of measures in place to help people finance post-graduate studies. For example, we recently announced proposals to reposition Career development Loans as a key additional source of support to help people finance learning, as new Professional and Career Development loans (PCDLs). PCDLs will offer more people the opportunity to re-skill and improve their employment prospects by offering more generous terms for the learner, such as loans up to £10,000 and lower interest rates.
Funding may also be available for individuals through the access to learning fund (ALF). The fund allows universities and colleges to provide extra discretionary support for students in particular need; it is administered directly by universities and colleges which are best placed to assess students circumstances."
I don't know if our campaign had any bearing on the matter, but when I first started writing to the minister, his responses all said that no extra funding was available for PG education. I suspect that the weight of letters on this issue has at least made them aware of the problem. You should all be very proud of your efforts so far.
I find the middle paragraph very encouraging. Of course, there are further questions, such as, what are the terms of repayment? And just how low will these interest rates be? But I think this is certainly progress on the matter and will change the life opportunities of some people, who would not otherwise have had the chance to enter PG education.
We do, in my opinion, need to keep pushing this issue along with funding for higher education in general. An extra £10,000 worth of debt is a lot, and the question of fees still needs addressing. Please let me know your opinion on this matter, because I think we have started to change the attitude of government, but there is still a lot of work to be done on this issue. Which matter should we pursue next?
In solidarity
Nick Barnett
Late last week I received a letter from the house of commons in response to two question submitted on my behalf by Mrs Louise Ellman, MP for Liverpool riverside. I would appreciate your thoughts on this issue.
Here is the text of one of the responses.
"Mrs Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside): TO ask the Secretary of State for innovation, universities and skills, if he will increase the funding available for students from poorer backgrounds to pursue postgraduate studies.
David Lammy:This government acknowledges the value of postgraduate studies. However, we have to prioritise the funding available. Our priority is to ensure that finance is no barrier to students achieving a first degree: that is why statutory student support is concentrated on undergraduates.
However, there are also a number of measures in place to help people finance post-graduate studies. For example, we recently announced proposals to reposition Career development Loans as a key additional source of support to help people finance learning, as new Professional and Career Development loans (PCDLs). PCDLs will offer more people the opportunity to re-skill and improve their employment prospects by offering more generous terms for the learner, such as loans up to £10,000 and lower interest rates.
Funding may also be available for individuals through the access to learning fund (ALF). The fund allows universities and colleges to provide extra discretionary support for students in particular need; it is administered directly by universities and colleges which are best placed to assess students circumstances."
I don't know if our campaign had any bearing on the matter, but when I first started writing to the minister, his responses all said that no extra funding was available for PG education. I suspect that the weight of letters on this issue has at least made them aware of the problem. You should all be very proud of your efforts so far.
I find the middle paragraph very encouraging. Of course, there are further questions, such as, what are the terms of repayment? And just how low will these interest rates be? But I think this is certainly progress on the matter and will change the life opportunities of some people, who would not otherwise have had the chance to enter PG education.
We do, in my opinion, need to keep pushing this issue along with funding for higher education in general. An extra £10,000 worth of debt is a lot, and the question of fees still needs addressing. Please let me know your opinion on this matter, because I think we have started to change the attitude of government, but there is still a lot of work to be done on this issue. Which matter should we pursue next?
In solidarity
Nick Barnett
Tuesday, 17 February 2009
What should graduates expect?
What should graduates expect?
This week recruiters have announced that 65% of them plan to cut their student recruitment schemes. (see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/feb/11/skilled-jobs-graduates-recession also http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=405362&c=1) Years of graduate unemployment and discontent are sure to follow. For several years now the economy has failed to keep up with the ever growing number of graduates, in 2007 the average graduate salary fell. This highlights two long overdue realisations. Firstly, the promise that a degree will always increase a person’s salary upon entering employment is not necessarily true. Secondly, something must be done to help graduates realise their potential or they will fall into discontent and entry rates into higher education will fall in the coming generations. Many graduates will leave university this year and discover that employers expect them to become a temp on the same minimum wage of people with no qualifications. Is this what students spend several years of their life accruing debt for?
For years the government, quite rightly, has sought to increase the numbers of young people entering higher education. The promise of a well-paid job at the end of the course, which would rapidly repay the student debts accrued over three or four years, was the rational and encouragement for this. This led to a growth in the number of skilled workers in the economy, often skills learned at universities would become redundant in a workplace that has failed to change for decades. The nature of our current economy means that wherever possible jobs will be outsourced, temporary and, of course, as low paid as possible. Until a change occurs which results in more highly skilled and fairly remunerated jobs in the economy graduates will continue to enter low skilled and low paid jobs, not the fantastic careers that schools, careers services and politicians have misleadingly promised them for years. This emphasis an education to find a job is outdated. The reasons for entering higher education should focus on learning a discipline which the student enjoys, the learning of new concepts which will produce a free-thinking individual and the experience which, for many, is a vital of growing up. This requires a complete change in thinking from government, schools, parents and, not least, universities themselves. Education in itself is a great thing and many individuals are only able to truly know themselves once they have benefitted from the skills and knowledge they are gifted at university.
The rise not only in graduate unemployment, but the failure of jobs to meet expectation will create discontent and could cause future generations to shun the university. Many people who graduated in the same year as myself have been forced to take, what would normally be described as, unskilled jobs. There is clearly a failure in the university which does not prepare such students to enter the workplace in a position that matches their skills, but also in the economy in keeping pace with the increasing skills base of the workforce. There are, in short, too many graduates chasing too few graduate positions. How are recent graduates supposed to feel when the only work available is in shops or factories? They have often invested up to five years of their lives in further and higher education, only to emerge and occupy the same positions as their parents. It is clear that universities responsibility for their students should not simply end upon graduation. Graduate or alumni associations need to be created which can inform graduates of new opportunities, not only for employment, but also future training.
The situation in the employment sector has changed so much with the extension of university education that a degree is no longer a guarantee of a good job, as it once professed to be. A combination of correct experience and higher degrees need to be used so that graduates are able to compete in the work place. The current provision of both of these is based on severe inequality. Work experience and internships are very often allocated by parents securing positions for their children. A working class person has to work much harder to reach a top professional position than one who received private education, has parental connections and built up the network opportunities over their life in education. Postgraduate education opportunities are largely limited to those who possess the ready money to pay in advance for course or else had the cultural capital through their parents to attend an elite university. This double inequality ensures that the top and increasingly, any professional, positions within society are monopolised by people whose attainments are completely dependent on the accident of their birth.
The prospects of the average graduate are limited indeed. They have been sold a lie that gradation will open endless opportunity when in actual fact they are as disadvantaged as their parents, albeit in a more covert way. It is time for graduates to form up into groups and societies and demand equality of opportunity. Education, Education, Education was promised to this generation, but all it has brought is inequality, inequality, inequality. The dominant groupings in society find ever more devious ways of ensuring that they hold the top positions. It is time for graduates to form together and demand a change.
This week recruiters have announced that 65% of them plan to cut their student recruitment schemes. (see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/feb/11/skilled-jobs-graduates-recession also http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=405362&c=1) Years of graduate unemployment and discontent are sure to follow. For several years now the economy has failed to keep up with the ever growing number of graduates, in 2007 the average graduate salary fell. This highlights two long overdue realisations. Firstly, the promise that a degree will always increase a person’s salary upon entering employment is not necessarily true. Secondly, something must be done to help graduates realise their potential or they will fall into discontent and entry rates into higher education will fall in the coming generations. Many graduates will leave university this year and discover that employers expect them to become a temp on the same minimum wage of people with no qualifications. Is this what students spend several years of their life accruing debt for?
For years the government, quite rightly, has sought to increase the numbers of young people entering higher education. The promise of a well-paid job at the end of the course, which would rapidly repay the student debts accrued over three or four years, was the rational and encouragement for this. This led to a growth in the number of skilled workers in the economy, often skills learned at universities would become redundant in a workplace that has failed to change for decades. The nature of our current economy means that wherever possible jobs will be outsourced, temporary and, of course, as low paid as possible. Until a change occurs which results in more highly skilled and fairly remunerated jobs in the economy graduates will continue to enter low skilled and low paid jobs, not the fantastic careers that schools, careers services and politicians have misleadingly promised them for years. This emphasis an education to find a job is outdated. The reasons for entering higher education should focus on learning a discipline which the student enjoys, the learning of new concepts which will produce a free-thinking individual and the experience which, for many, is a vital of growing up. This requires a complete change in thinking from government, schools, parents and, not least, universities themselves. Education in itself is a great thing and many individuals are only able to truly know themselves once they have benefitted from the skills and knowledge they are gifted at university.
The rise not only in graduate unemployment, but the failure of jobs to meet expectation will create discontent and could cause future generations to shun the university. Many people who graduated in the same year as myself have been forced to take, what would normally be described as, unskilled jobs. There is clearly a failure in the university which does not prepare such students to enter the workplace in a position that matches their skills, but also in the economy in keeping pace with the increasing skills base of the workforce. There are, in short, too many graduates chasing too few graduate positions. How are recent graduates supposed to feel when the only work available is in shops or factories? They have often invested up to five years of their lives in further and higher education, only to emerge and occupy the same positions as their parents. It is clear that universities responsibility for their students should not simply end upon graduation. Graduate or alumni associations need to be created which can inform graduates of new opportunities, not only for employment, but also future training.
The situation in the employment sector has changed so much with the extension of university education that a degree is no longer a guarantee of a good job, as it once professed to be. A combination of correct experience and higher degrees need to be used so that graduates are able to compete in the work place. The current provision of both of these is based on severe inequality. Work experience and internships are very often allocated by parents securing positions for their children. A working class person has to work much harder to reach a top professional position than one who received private education, has parental connections and built up the network opportunities over their life in education. Postgraduate education opportunities are largely limited to those who possess the ready money to pay in advance for course or else had the cultural capital through their parents to attend an elite university. This double inequality ensures that the top and increasingly, any professional, positions within society are monopolised by people whose attainments are completely dependent on the accident of their birth.
The prospects of the average graduate are limited indeed. They have been sold a lie that gradation will open endless opportunity when in actual fact they are as disadvantaged as their parents, albeit in a more covert way. It is time for graduates to form up into groups and societies and demand equality of opportunity. Education, Education, Education was promised to this generation, but all it has brought is inequality, inequality, inequality. The dominant groupings in society find ever more devious ways of ensuring that they hold the top positions. It is time for graduates to form together and demand a change.
Thursday, 5 February 2009
Study into University Inequality
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/feb/03/university-access-social-exclusion
This article reveals the results of research, based on postcodes, which will surprise nobody. Students from rich backgrounds go to the universities which receive the most government funding, whilst the poorer and more numerous students are left scrabbling for the smaller pots of money. This shows that cultural capital has a direct result on a persons life chances. Not only will the child of a parent from a rich postal area go to a better university but they will as a result have better employment prospects, due to the fact that it is people from these universities which compose the business elite.
The government must act now to dismantle groups such as the Russell group or the 1994 group who ensure that they monopolise all the funding whilst the majority of universities receive next to nothing. It is all very well to talk about excellence in research but this does not reflect exellence in teaching. Wealthy parents know this and push their children to enter a prestigious university knowing full well that the name on the degree will count at the end of three years, despite the student experience being virtually the same.
Attempts to promote diversity by the New Labour government are failing, possibly due to the fact that they do not represent the majority of the population themselves. The technocrats have failed to reduce inequality in the system. Whilst millions of pounds go into the bankers bulging pockets university departments struggle for cash and attempt to reposition themselves in the meaningless league tables. The idea that quality could be quantified is a complete aberration. DIUS is not fit for purpose. A more equal distribution of HEFCE and research council money is needed, allowing each university to provide excellence to its students who are situated at their particular institution because of one thing: Class.
This government declared that class does not exist, it was woefully wrong. Over the previous ten years class inequality has grown and whilst women's rights, racial issues and the rights of LGBT people are, quite rightly, acceptable topics, class has been ignored by a party which once claimed to represent the Working Class. Higher Education requires a bailout of the proportions given to the bankers so that it can produce intelligent workers capable of innovating their way out of recession. Alongside this must go training opportunities for all people, whatever their age. Adult literacy classes must be free and must grow. Apprenticeships, which pay a fair wage and give real qualifications to people who do not see themselves as academically minded, must be introduced. Equal opportunites at post graduate level must be given to those who enter their institution because of class, and the ability to pay made available to those whose parents can not afford to pay. All this could be done for a fraction of the money given to bankers whose greed caused the collapse of the economy, let education help us out of it.
This article reveals the results of research, based on postcodes, which will surprise nobody. Students from rich backgrounds go to the universities which receive the most government funding, whilst the poorer and more numerous students are left scrabbling for the smaller pots of money. This shows that cultural capital has a direct result on a persons life chances. Not only will the child of a parent from a rich postal area go to a better university but they will as a result have better employment prospects, due to the fact that it is people from these universities which compose the business elite.
The government must act now to dismantle groups such as the Russell group or the 1994 group who ensure that they monopolise all the funding whilst the majority of universities receive next to nothing. It is all very well to talk about excellence in research but this does not reflect exellence in teaching. Wealthy parents know this and push their children to enter a prestigious university knowing full well that the name on the degree will count at the end of three years, despite the student experience being virtually the same.
Attempts to promote diversity by the New Labour government are failing, possibly due to the fact that they do not represent the majority of the population themselves. The technocrats have failed to reduce inequality in the system. Whilst millions of pounds go into the bankers bulging pockets university departments struggle for cash and attempt to reposition themselves in the meaningless league tables. The idea that quality could be quantified is a complete aberration. DIUS is not fit for purpose. A more equal distribution of HEFCE and research council money is needed, allowing each university to provide excellence to its students who are situated at their particular institution because of one thing: Class.
This government declared that class does not exist, it was woefully wrong. Over the previous ten years class inequality has grown and whilst women's rights, racial issues and the rights of LGBT people are, quite rightly, acceptable topics, class has been ignored by a party which once claimed to represent the Working Class. Higher Education requires a bailout of the proportions given to the bankers so that it can produce intelligent workers capable of innovating their way out of recession. Alongside this must go training opportunities for all people, whatever their age. Adult literacy classes must be free and must grow. Apprenticeships, which pay a fair wage and give real qualifications to people who do not see themselves as academically minded, must be introduced. Equal opportunites at post graduate level must be given to those who enter their institution because of class, and the ability to pay made available to those whose parents can not afford to pay. All this could be done for a fraction of the money given to bankers whose greed caused the collapse of the economy, let education help us out of it.
Sunday, 1 February 2009
Online Petition
Whilst funding for Higher education in general is under by the current New-Labour administration, Postgraduate education in particular is completely ignored by the government. With over 500,000 postgraduate students this rapidly expanding sector is creating a new benchmark in skills required to achieve the top posts in the country. The inequality inherent in the current funding system is producing a situation where an hereditary educated elite monopolises the best training and the best jobs in the country.
This situation needs to change, graduates need to make a stand and demand not only access to jobs in line with their skills but access to opportunities from which the government currently excludes the majority.
Please sign the following on-line petition: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/PostgradLoans/ . Let us make up the numbers and force Prime Minister Gordon Brown to give us an explanation as to why this situation is allowed to continue. Whilst banks and car makers get billions to bail out their failing and corrupt industries the education system is forced to cap the numbers of students and social mobility is postponed for yet another generation. This is not acceptable from a government which in name claims to support the Working Class. National debt may be expanding, but with only a fraction of the amount spent on supporting the high wages and bonuses of banker education could be used to provide a decent future to thousands of people.
This situation needs to change, graduates need to make a stand and demand not only access to jobs in line with their skills but access to opportunities from which the government currently excludes the majority.
Please sign the following on-line petition: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/PostgradLoans/ . Let us make up the numbers and force Prime Minister Gordon Brown to give us an explanation as to why this situation is allowed to continue. Whilst banks and car makers get billions to bail out their failing and corrupt industries the education system is forced to cap the numbers of students and social mobility is postponed for yet another generation. This is not acceptable from a government which in name claims to support the Working Class. National debt may be expanding, but with only a fraction of the amount spent on supporting the high wages and bonuses of banker education could be used to provide a decent future to thousands of people.
Wednesday, 28 January 2009
Government lays yet another barrier in the way of social mobility
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/jan/22/university-recruitment-cap
The above article shows the current government has placed a cap on student numbers for at least the next two years. In a period where youth unemployment is expected to grow, they would rather see the unfortunate ones rot on the dole than offer them a chance at aiming for something new. By claiming that budgetry constrainsts lead the decision, in the wake of a growth in number of students and the recession of the economy they are demonstrating short-sighted thinking. The long term benefit of funding each student through university vastly outweighs the costs of years spent claiming benefits and the social deprivation which accompanies this.
Not only has this government failed to remove barriers to talented graduates entering post-graduate education and the professional industries, they are also reversing their own much needed policy of increasing availability of higher education. This is a disgusting situation and is not acceptable from a government which claims to look after the interests of labour. They are condemming thousands to years of poverty, whereas for a short term investment, most of which is repayable with interest, they could be offering opportunity and future success. This moribund administration is secretly cutting our public services in order to bail out the fat-cats who they have lain in bed with for a decade. It is time to cut loose the greed of the bankers and bring these institutions under control of the customers. Offer the population the opportunity it needs to improve itself or we will live with the consequences for years to come.
The above article shows the current government has placed a cap on student numbers for at least the next two years. In a period where youth unemployment is expected to grow, they would rather see the unfortunate ones rot on the dole than offer them a chance at aiming for something new. By claiming that budgetry constrainsts lead the decision, in the wake of a growth in number of students and the recession of the economy they are demonstrating short-sighted thinking. The long term benefit of funding each student through university vastly outweighs the costs of years spent claiming benefits and the social deprivation which accompanies this.
Not only has this government failed to remove barriers to talented graduates entering post-graduate education and the professional industries, they are also reversing their own much needed policy of increasing availability of higher education. This is a disgusting situation and is not acceptable from a government which claims to look after the interests of labour. They are condemming thousands to years of poverty, whereas for a short term investment, most of which is repayable with interest, they could be offering opportunity and future success. This moribund administration is secretly cutting our public services in order to bail out the fat-cats who they have lain in bed with for a decade. It is time to cut loose the greed of the bankers and bring these institutions under control of the customers. Offer the population the opportunity it needs to improve itself or we will live with the consequences for years to come.
Saturday, 10 January 2009
An old but vital article
The attached article comes from Paul Wakeling in 2003 and was published in the times. It talks about how labour policy has been "fair access" to higher education, but ignores the fact that social class still counts when people reach the age of 21. It berates the lack of opportunity for many to enter continuing education.
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=178672§ioncode=26
This issue is something that has become even more important in the intervening 5 or 6 years. With more and more people entering postgraduate education. According to figures, provided to me by the government last month, there has been a 21.5% increase in PG numbers since 2001, now accounting for 545,369 people. The government has done little to extend opportunities in postgraduate education to the wider population and professional employment and skilled work is in increasing danger of once again becoming an elite pursuit.
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=178672§ioncode=26
This issue is something that has become even more important in the intervening 5 or 6 years. With more and more people entering postgraduate education. According to figures, provided to me by the government last month, there has been a 21.5% increase in PG numbers since 2001, now accounting for 545,369 people. The government has done little to extend opportunities in postgraduate education to the wider population and professional employment and skilled work is in increasing danger of once again becoming an elite pursuit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)